So all non-violent protests fail. Most violent protests fail.
And the term тАЬworkedтАЭ is quite subjective.
For example, right now, gay people around the country are celebrating Pride month. Pride is a commemoration of the StoneWall Riot, that was extremely violent (тАЬwho threw the first brick at police?тАЭ) Yes, gay people had lovely colorful matches, but they also rioted regularly, had a militant wing, AND FOUGHT BACK when police came for them.
In 2020, during the George Floyd protests, at first, Derek Chauvin and his murderous colleagues faced no charges. The people REALLY protested. To calm down the protest, Chauvin was charged with trivial charges. The people protested more. Finally the AG can in and charged Chauvin AND the others with murder. The protest worked.
In 2000, a group of Republican hacks violently attacked a polling place in Miami, where a recount was underway. The people recounting the vote stopped out of fear. They never restarted the recount, SCOTUS ruled that they shouldnтАЩt restart the recount, and Bush won, which was a disaster for the country. That riot worked.
I could go on.
Non-violent protests fail. Only violent protests have ever worked.
Two good examples for certain, but I would argue that the entirety of the Black Lives Matter protests were a matter of winning the battle and losing the war.
The Black Lives Matter protest failed BECAUSE it became non-violent.
A few months ago, JVL wrote a triad called: тАЬHow to Think (and Act) Like a Dissident MovementтАЭ where he argues that the collective power and energy of the masses should be given to politicians, to encourage and support them to stand up to Trump.
I called bullshit, because thatтАЩs exactly what happened with Black Lives Matter.
As I mentioned, it was violent protest that eventually had Chauvin charged with murder.
But then, it became a mass, non-violent protest, which, as JVL suggested, became a political process (instead of protest), between Senator Booker and Senator Scott.
That was its demise. Now as a Congressional Senate process, between two black conservatives, it stalled, and then died.
During that slow dying, the conservative language spin doctors got to work; smearing every Democrat with the tag they wanted to тАЬdefund the policeтАЭ.
And it worked.
Senator ScottтАЩs final coup de grace was an announcement saying that HE refuses to тАЬdefund the policeтАЭ.
And thatтАЩs how the worldтАЩs biggest protest movement ended, with a slogan.
This slogan was used as a club against democrats for the next FOUR YEARS. Incredible.
The problem was when the violent protesters gave DC politicians a veto over the outcome of the protest.
It should have stayed violent if it had wanted to succeed. Look at the entirety of US history and tell me IтАЩm wrong.
What if, after тАЬthe shot heard round the worldтАЭ, a couple of US politicians had gone to King George in England to negotiate better terms for the colonies?
Would the United States ever have gained independence?
ThereтАЩs two reasons to тАЬprotestтАЭ in America:
1. To politely register your dissatisfaction about a subject with the authorities. You feel youтАЩve done your bit, and the authorities casually ignore you. This has been the story of every single non-violent protest.
2. To change the situation, to fight back against tyranny, to REALLY show them that there ARE more of us than them, to make them understand we will not tolerate the situation any longer. In short: to scare them enough that change occurs.
People often confuse and conflate the two. They are radically different.
Riots are the only thing that works.
Which ones "worked". Be specific.
So all non-violent protests fail. Most violent protests fail.
And the term тАЬworkedтАЭ is quite subjective.
For example, right now, gay people around the country are celebrating Pride month. Pride is a commemoration of the StoneWall Riot, that was extremely violent (тАЬwho threw the first brick at police?тАЭ) Yes, gay people had lovely colorful matches, but they also rioted regularly, had a militant wing, AND FOUGHT BACK when police came for them.
In 2020, during the George Floyd protests, at first, Derek Chauvin and his murderous colleagues faced no charges. The people REALLY protested. To calm down the protest, Chauvin was charged with trivial charges. The people protested more. Finally the AG can in and charged Chauvin AND the others with murder. The protest worked.
In 2000, a group of Republican hacks violently attacked a polling place in Miami, where a recount was underway. The people recounting the vote stopped out of fear. They never restarted the recount, SCOTUS ruled that they shouldnтАЩt restart the recount, and Bush won, which was a disaster for the country. That riot worked.
I could go on.
Non-violent protests fail. Only violent protests have ever worked.
Two good examples for certain, but I would argue that the entirety of the Black Lives Matter protests were a matter of winning the battle and losing the war.
Because ::::::gestures vaguely around:::::::::::
The Black Lives Matter protest failed BECAUSE it became non-violent.
A few months ago, JVL wrote a triad called: тАЬHow to Think (and Act) Like a Dissident MovementтАЭ where he argues that the collective power and energy of the masses should be given to politicians, to encourage and support them to stand up to Trump.
I called bullshit, because thatтАЩs exactly what happened with Black Lives Matter.
As I mentioned, it was violent protest that eventually had Chauvin charged with murder.
But then, it became a mass, non-violent protest, which, as JVL suggested, became a political process (instead of protest), between Senator Booker and Senator Scott.
That was its demise. Now as a Congressional Senate process, between two black conservatives, it stalled, and then died.
During that slow dying, the conservative language spin doctors got to work; smearing every Democrat with the tag they wanted to тАЬdefund the policeтАЭ.
And it worked.
Senator ScottтАЩs final coup de grace was an announcement saying that HE refuses to тАЬdefund the policeтАЭ.
And thatтАЩs how the worldтАЩs biggest protest movement ended, with a slogan.
This slogan was used as a club against democrats for the next FOUR YEARS. Incredible.
The problem was when the violent protesters gave DC politicians a veto over the outcome of the protest.
It should have stayed violent if it had wanted to succeed. Look at the entirety of US history and tell me IтАЩm wrong.
What if, after тАЬthe shot heard round the worldтАЭ, a couple of US politicians had gone to King George in England to negotiate better terms for the colonies?
Would the United States ever have gained independence?
No, the founding fathers fought till it was won.
This is incorrect. Please listen to Heather Cox Richardson Politics Chat June 10 video at 31:43:"Why do we protest in America?"
Heather Cox Richardson is a liar.
ThereтАЩs two reasons to тАЬprotestтАЭ in America:
1. To politely register your dissatisfaction about a subject with the authorities. You feel youтАЩve done your bit, and the authorities casually ignore you. This has been the story of every single non-violent protest.
2. To change the situation, to fight back against tyranny, to REALLY show them that there ARE more of us than them, to make them understand we will not tolerate the situation any longer. In short: to scare them enough that change occurs.
People often confuse and conflate the two. They are radically different.
Thank you for your response.